Israel & Replacement Theology: "What about 'forever' don't you understand?"

I think I've made it clear that politically I'm on Israel's side and consider the "Palestinian" claims to be trumped up by the leftists.

However, I'm not as clear on the theological question of "replacement theology." I do know that some who are on Israel's side object strenuously to the idea, understanding it to mean Israel has been replaced by the Church, thereby negating Israel's claims to the land. They base much of their argument on the scripture which says the covenant God made with Israel was everlasting.

Gen 13:15 For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.

Gen 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

The relevant passages do read as if the land was given forever, but obviously this can't be since the earth itself isn't to last forever:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

I assume they have some way of reconciling this, but it seems to me the only sufficient way of reconciling it is to understand that the everlasting covenant with Abraham didn't refer to the literal physical land but to spiritual Zion:

Hebrews 11:10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker [is] God.

Hebrews 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels.

The New Testament teaches that those who are of faith are children of Abraham and inherit God's covenant with him. The flesh does not inherit, only the spirit. We look to the spiritual Zion, the city whose builder and maker is God, not to earthly Israel.

Just as did Abraham, as Hebrews 11:10 says. He "sojourned" in the "land of promise," living in a tent, never as a resident of the land, never receiving the fulfillment of THAT land, although God had promised it specifically to him, as well as to his descendants. This alone hints that the land is a symbol or a type of a better "land," which the New Testament brings out more clearly.

HOWEVER: Insofar as the promise pointed to the physical land there is no doubt that God did give it to Abraham and his descendants and therefore nobody else has a claim to it. The covenant with Abraham, unlike the covenant that came through Moses, was unbreakable. The Israelites broke the covenant through Moses but the Abrahamic covenant is everlasting and unbroken. So it's perfectly reasonable to argue that the literal physical land of Israel which was given literal geographic boundaries by God, does belong to the Jews. Even though that land isn't going to be everlasting.

But now we are not talking about the heirs of the promise to Abraham, but to "Jacob," ("supplanter, layer of snares", says Strong's Concordance, the descendants of Abraham "after the flesh" and not after the spirit. Jacob was his given name, but God renamed him "Israel" ("prince with God") after he had finally come to the point of complete dependence on God.

Christians, who inherit the heavenly Jerusalem, have no interest in earthly Israel, and that includes saved Jews as well. But scripture speaks of a "time of trouble" for "Jacob" which many interpret to be yet future, and it is "Jacob" who now lives in Israel, earthly Israel of the flesh.

The point is there CAN'T really be a "replacement" of Israel by the Church because these are two different things, or two different levels. The Church is of heavenly Jerusalem and this world is "passing away." HOWEVER, the Old Testament dealt with a literal fleshly people and a literal physical land, and although the fulfillment of the promise of God is in reality a spiritual or heavenly fulfillment, it may well be that God has further plans for Jacob and for earthly Israel. The point would be that the entire earth belongs to God and His dealing with Israel and in fact His whole plan of redemption, are meant to bring honor and glory to Himself on this Planet Earth, even through all the heathen of the world who are at enmity with Him, and THAT part of His plan is not yet finished.

1 John 2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Paul writes poignantly of the temporary blinding of Israel so that the Gentiles might be saved:

Rom 9:2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises; Rom 9:5 Whose [are] the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ [came], who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Romans 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. Rom 10:2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

And this tells us that besides showing the whole world who He is and that He reigns over all things, He WILL also save "all Israel," and clearly all this is yet future.

But it is ALL tending to this point: Those who are saved are saved to the heavenly Jerusalem. Flesh cannot be saved in its current condition. Those who are not born again, who remain flesh, remain unsaved and can only be destined for the lake of fire.

So all those scenarios I keep running across about an ULTIMATE separate destiny for earthly Israel and the Church just don't make sense. Salvation of Jew and Gentile makes us both part of the Church AND part of the heavenly Jerusalem. It may be that there will be a period -- even the Millennium? -- in which Jesus reigns over earth from earthly Jerusalem -- but this can only be a temporary dispensation.

But then there is also to be a new heaven and a new earth and I've never been sure how to fit all these things together:

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

I'd like to see these points addressed by those who defend that point of view.

"Replacement theology," Israel and the Antichrist

Listening this morning to a talk at a conference in Israel, a conference of mostly pro-Palestinian / anti-Israel Christian leftists, in which this talk was apparently the only one from the opposing point of view.

Apparently the leftist Christian position is based on what is called "replacement theology," the idea that the church has replaced Israel, from which theology the leftists get their hatred of Israel, their arguments that Israel is an apartheid state mistreating the Palestinian people who are the true heirs of the land and so on and so forth.

I don't see the connection. The leftist position, Christian or non-Christian, is just obviously wrong historically and ethically quite apart from whatever theology they appeal to.

There never was any Palestinian people, that is an invention of the haters of Israel. The settling of what eventually became the Jewish state began back in the 19th century when the area known as Palestine had no national identity whatever and no population indigenous to it. Mark Twain visited it and described it as a desolate wasteland. There were a few scattered Arabs and there were also some Jews, mostly in Jerusalem, who had been there from time immemorial. If occupation of the land at that time has any bearing on the argument the Jews have a better claim to it than the Arabs.

The Jews who moved into the area from Europe set about building up this desolate wasteland. What became known as the Palestinian people were Arabs from many of the surrounding Arab nations who came to work for the Jews in this building up. As the Jews succeeded in making the area livable they became the targets of growing hostility from the neighboring Arab nations. When these nations declared war on Israel just as it became a state they simultaneously warned the Arabs living there to escape for their own protection. They did escape and they became the refugees that were ultimately renamed "Palestinians." A whole bogus supposed history was bestowed to make them appear to be the legitimate heirs of the land that had become the Israeli state, and I have the impression that some of them even believe their own lie. Their own Arab people would not absorb them but left them as refugees in order to be a thorn in the side of Israel. Attempts to resolve the situation keep failing because the "Palestinians" have always refused whatever concessions Israel has made to their demands for a state. The reason they refuse is that they hate Israel, period, and want Israel gone, period.

I've written about this more in other posts. The point is that the leftists are motivated by hated of Israel and have no legitimate basis for their hatred and their support of this bogus "Palestinian people." What they call apartheid tactics against the Palestinians, such as a wall that keeps them out except at certain guarded checkpoints, are nothing but attempts by Israel to defend themselves from repeated attacks by the "Palestinians," rockets they fire daily into Israel among other acts of hostility. The whole Palestinian / Leftist claim is a big fat lie. Yet somehow they've managed to make most of the world believe it.

But what does any of this have to do with "replacement theology?" Those who argue against this theology, as the speaker does I've been listening to this morning, emphasize the idea that God's covenant with Israel is still in force because it was everlasting, and it's a covenant that entitles them to the land as well as a covenant to make them the people who will bless the whole world as carriers of the word of the true God and His Messiah.

I have to admit that I don't have a thorough understanding of the scriptures in this situation, but from what I think I understand about it I'm not on either side theologically. I could change my mind but for now it goes like this: I do not believe the church has "replaced" Israel, but I do believe the church is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant God made with Israel. We ARE the "new Israel" through the Messiah, the people of God. The Messiah Himself is the fulfiller of the covenants, He is the blessing to the Gentiles God wanted Israel to be. All that is fulfilled. The land promised to Israel is the "other country" Abraham and others looked to according to Hebrews 11, not an earthly land.

This does NOT mean that God doesn't still have a role for Israel the literal physical land. At the very least we know that scripture promises a huge conversion of Jews to Jesus Christ at the very end of time. But beyond that, it is utterly impossible that the Jews could be on the land and it not be God's will, even though they are still not IN God's will themselves. That physical land is clearly going to be the center of the end times scenario that is probably going to play out very soon. It's most likely going to involve a huge war, a bloodbath, out of which will emerge, if he doesn't preside over it from the beginning, a personage known as the Antichrist who will have the worldwide rule that was coveted by the earlier antichrists such as Hitler.

I don't know what to make of the various theologies that give separate roles to the Jews and the Church. I don't see scripture for that myself. I see scripture saying we are one people, Jew and Gentile, we are all the Church and we are all Israel.

And yet it does seem to be that God may have separate dealings with his original chosen people as these end times unfold. I get this probably more from the current world situation and history than from scripture, though I'm sure there is scripture for it, I'm just not adept at exegeting it.

The leftist position is evil, period. Israel is in the defensive position, not the aggressor position. All this is simply setting the stage for the grand finale showdown between Satan and Christ. It's not going to be fun, there will no doubt be millions of martyrs, but the end result will be the worldwide rule of Christ.

No doubt there are plenty of specifics that I'm overlooking, though I think my position is general enough that they won't contradict anything I've said. I could be wrong.

"Replacement theology" is skewed, there is no replacement but there is fulfillment in the Church, which includes both Jew and Gentile. But nothing in this way of looking at it denies the right of Israel to exist, or that the Jews are still God's people in a historical sense, and it certainly doesn't justify the lying claims for this bogus "Palestinian people" which is just an invention of Satan in his neverending quest to destroy God's people and plans. The leftist "Christians" are just going to be part of the Antichrist's worldwide religion in the end.

Open Letter to Evangelicals again: The State of Israel in the end times

An Open Letter to Evangelicals and Other Interested Parties:
The People of God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel.

This came up in conversation again recently, so although I already did a two-part blog on it last year I would like to try to say it again more briefly. This Open Letter aims to answer a statement from some evangelical leaders urging American support of Israel on the basis of scripture. According to the Open Letter, apparently some are teaching that

God's alleged favor toward Israel today is based upon ethnic descent rather than upon the grace of Christ alone, as proclaimed in the Gospel.

and others are teaching

that the Bible's promises concerning the land are fulfilled in a special political region or "Holy Land," perpetually set apart by God for one ethnic group alone.

And this is what the Open Letter seeks to answer.

The Open Letter goes on to present the Gospel of salvation as universal in answer to claims for any ethnic group. There is only one way of salvation for all.

4. Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully man, came into the world to save sinners. In his death upon the cross, Jesus was the Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world, of Jew and of Gentile alike. The death of Jesus forever fulfilled and eternally ended the sacrifices of the Jewish temple. All who would worship God, whether Jew or Gentile, must now come to him in spirit and truth through Jesus Christ alone. The worship of God is no longer identified with any specific earthly sanctuary. He receives worship only through Jesus Christ, the eternal and heavenly Temple ...

7. Jesus taught that his resurrection was the raising of the True Temple of Israel. He has replaced the priesthood, sacrifices, and sanctuary of Israel by fulfilling them in his own glorious priestly ministry and by offering, once and for all, his sacrifice for the world, that is, for both Jew and Gentile. Believers from all nations are now being built up through him into this Third Temple, the church that Jesus promised to build. ...

9. The entitlement of any one ethnic or religious group to territory in the Middle East called the "Holy Land" cannot be supported by Scripture. In fact, the land promises specific to Israel in the Old Testament were fulfilled under Joshua. The New Testament speaks clearly and prophetically about the destruction of the second temple in A.D. 70. No New Testament writer foresees a regathering of ethnic Israel in the land, as did the prophets of the Old Testament after the destruction of the first temple in 586 B.C. Moreover, the land promises of the Old Covenant are consistently and deliberately expanded in the New Testament to show the universal dominion of Jesus, who reigns from heaven upon the throne of David, inviting all the nations through the Gospel of Grace to partake of his universal and everlasting dominion.

The promised Messianic kingdom of Jesus Christ has been inaugurated. Its advent marks the focal point of human history. This kingdom of the Messiah is continuing to realize its fullness as believing Jews and Gentiles are added to the community of the redeemed in every generation. The same kingdom will be manifested in its final and eternal form with the return of Christ the King in all his glory. ...

The present secular state of Israel, however, is not an authentic or prophetic realization of the Messianic kingdom of Jesus Christ.

I agree, and to the extent that some see the gospel as coming to fruition through the state of Israel I disagree with them. On the other hand, while Israel is not a fulfillment of Messianic prophecy it does look like a fulfillment of some literal prophecies about the flowering of that land again, the return of the Jews to that land at the end and so on.

While the state of Israel does not fulfill MESSIANIC prophecy (except as the final stage before Jesus' second advent) I can see it as a fulfillment of prophecy of the playing out of the claims of fallen human nature under the Antichrist just before the return of Jesus. Religious Jews are still expecting their Messiah, blinded to the fact that they rejected the true Messiah 2000 years ago, and who would that be but the Antichrist?

I do see God behind all this, however. I've found some speculation on the web that Satan is behind it. That can't be so -- his part seems to be mostly against Israel. There have been miraculous events protecting Israel from its Arab enemies and that has to be God. Those who deny that Israel has a right to be on the land also see the Palestinians as the victims of Israel, but I see it the other way around. Whatever Israel's rights to the land from a biblical perspective, they acquired it fairly and the land was pretty much barren when they started the process -- see Mark Twain's description of the area as a wilderness when he was there in the 19th century. The Palestinian people did not exist at that time, there was no people with that name at all and the current "Palestinians" are not of one tribe but from many different Arab backgrounds. They were Arabs from the surrounding nations who came to work for the Israelis in building up the land, who left Israel in a mass exodus before one of the Arab attacks on Israel, having been warned of the attack BY the Arabs. They became a refugee camp that then took on the false identity of a Palestinian nation. Meanwhile Israel absorbed many Jewish refugees from those same Arab lands. The Arab nations should have absorbed back the Arab refugees but they found it more useful to leave them there with the implication that their sufferings were all the fault of Israel.

The prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 found a literal fulfillment in a historically documented period of 69 times 7 years from a specific point in history to the revelation of Jesus Christ as King as He rode into Jerusalem on the donkey. The prophecy was literal and was exactly and literally fulfilled in the first advent of the Messiah. There is a "seventieth week" left in that prophecy that has not yet been fulfilled and must also be fulfilled in the same literal historical way the first 69 "weeks" were fulfilled. This is a last "week of years" or seven years that it seems to me can't just be palmed off with an allegorical interpretation but must be a literal time yet to come. There are many indications that this is to be a time in which not Christ but the usurper, Christ's imitator the Antichrist, possessed by the devil, will take the reins of world government in Christ's name, at the end of which time the true King will return. Some Jews will receive this fake as their Messiah. For this purpose a reinstated temple in Jerusalem would make perfect sense.

The complaints of the Open Letter that those who are looking to a literal physical Israel are misrepresenting the gospel of Christ may be true of many, and of course if so they are wrong -- literal physical Israel isn't really about the gospel, it's about the playing out of the end times drama of pure evil as all the powers of the devil and fallen human nature come together to rule the world, bringing the whole fallen creation to its fullest possible expression and final defeat. Not all prophecies are Messianic prophecies. The four empires prophesied by Daniel embody the doings of fallen humanity, and the Messiah comes into it only as He is prophesied to overthrow the fourth and last empire and usher in the Kingdom that will last forever. We are now living in the dispensation in which Christ has come and yet the fallen world continues alongside. It makes sense to me to think that the fallen world has yet to come to its own "perfection" as it were -- a "perfection" of error and evil -- before the Lord returns for good.

Israel is STILL the geographic location where God chose to place His name. It's still a type, it's not the gospel, but this earth hasn't yet fled away and while it's here that piece of geography is still where God put His name. For it to function as a magnet for all the forces of evil to come together at the very end to try to defeat God makes perfect sense. Yes, the gospel is fulfilled in the HEAVENLY Jerusalem not the earthly Jerusalem but we are still living on this planet and this planet is where the Antichrist is going to appear and rule, and the Mount of Olives is literally where the Lord Jesus is going to appear Himself as well, at the very end when he returns to take possession of His people and His entire creation.

So I'm claiming that there is still a history to be played out in the original land given to the Jews by God, although all that is now fulfilled in Christ. Scripture apparently prophesies that the Israelis will suffer terribly in that land before the final day, but that God will be their ultimate protector and defender, even fighting for them against their enemies, and that a great number of them will finally be saved.

The purpose of this is not so much about the gospel as it is about God's ownership of Planet Earth. God has always had the purpose to save through the gospel a people for Himself, but He has also always had this other purpose as well -- to demonstrate His glory and His reign over the earth to ALL people, in fact to the entire Creation in heaven and in earth. EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW to the King of Kings when He comes to claim His possession, EVERY KNEE, not just the knees of believers. The unsaved, the unregenerate, the damned and the doomed and every other living thing will bow to the true King of Creation in the end, and ALL will see Him with their physical eyes when He returns.

Evil must have its day and then the wicked will be shown their error as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords returns to claim His inheritance, His believing people but also the physical world He created.

Furthermore, a day should not be anticipated in which Christ's kingdom will manifest Jewish distinctives, whether by its location in "the land," by its constituency, or by its ceremonial institutions and practices.

However, there do seem to be prophecies about these very distinctives, but the mistake, it seems to me, is to think of any of this as manifesting CHRIST'S KINGDOM. Rather it will be the manifestation of ANTICHRIST's kingdom. The Book of Revelation calls Jerusalem Sodom after all.

Instead, this present age will come to a climactic conclusion with the arrival of the final, eternal phase of the kingdom of the Messiah. At that time, all eyes, even of those who pierced him, will see the King in his glory. Every knee will bow, and every tongue will declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. The kingdoms of this world will become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign forever and ever.

Quite. But HOW things are going to arrive at this point looks to me like it's going to include physical Israel -- apostate Israel, yes, but an Israel in which multitudes of Jews will come to see the truth and be saved even out of the most horrifying tribulation. And THEN will come the "climactic conclusion with the arrival of the final, eternal phase of the kingdom of the Messiah."

I could be wrong about this -- and probably am wrong about SOME of it in any case -- but I'm more and more committed to something along these lines. I think BOTH sides of this argument are partly right and partly wrong. There is a both/and here. To the extent that the pro-Israel evangelicals confuse God's purposes in Israel with His purposes in the gospel they are wrong or at least have the cart before the horse, but they have something right in their reading of prophecy nevertheless, which the Reformed camp behind the Open Letter is overlooking.

Answer to Reformed Objections continued

Continued from previous post:

Rather, the promise of an inheritance is made to those only who have faith in Jesus, the True Heir of Abraham. All spiritual benefits are derived from Jesus, and apart from him there is no participation in the promises. Since Jesus Christ is the Mediator of the Abrahamic Covenant, all who bless him and his people will be blessed of God, and all who curse him and his people will be cursed of God. These promises do not apply to any particular ethnic group, but to the church of Jesus Christ, the true Israel.

Yes, we understand this. This is the New Testament revelation of the meaning of the Old Testament and it is absolutely correct.

HOWEVER, not ALL the promises of God apply to Christ and His church in such a direct way. The 69 weeks of years mentioned above were a pointer to the coming of Christ but they were a literal 69 weeks of years literally fulfilled. God DID promise Abraham that his descendants would inhabit the land of Canaan and they literally did. God's prophets did warn of coming disasters that were also historically fulfilled. God did reveal through Daniel that four great empires would arise one after the other -- all types of the human and no doubt also demonically inspired rebellion against God -- and this was historically fulfilled.

In fact, think about it -- the whole last "week" of years is pretty much the time of the devil, the Antichrist and the Human Rebellion come to its pinnacle of expression. Daniel's visions were predominantly of the growth of evil in the world, the enemies of God, and the Book of Revelation echoes his themes. The revelation of Christ's Kingdom as "not of this world" shows the true heavenly mission of redemption and salvation, but meanwhile there is still an unfinished drama to be played out on planet Earth. It will be a time when evil is completely unrestrained. We look forward to the coming of Christ (and speaking for myself I yearn for that more and more these days), but I have the impression that scripture is telling us that there is to be a massive culmination of the "mystery of iniquity" before that happens, in a specially marked-out time for that purpose -- the time when the Anti-king does his damnedest, you could say, to demonstrate his right to reign, only to be destroyed when the true King appears.

NOBODY (?I hope) is arguing that earthly Israel is some kind of perfection of God's plan, while it was originally God's picture of His plan of redemption, it would now, after Christ, be a miscarriage of God's plan and that is the whole point. If the temple is restored, just as Israel is restored, it is so that the forces of evil get to play themselves out to the hilt.

The Book of Revelation calls the "holy city" by the name of the evil city Sodom and the evil empire Egypt.

Re 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

And yet there will be these two true witnesses of God alluded to in that verse denouncing it all, and there will be many who will come to see the truth, believe and be saved, giving glory to God -- EVEN in a time of the purest unrestrained evil imaginable, the full blossoming of fallen human "perfection" under the influence of the devil.

Why not, Reformed people? I don't see how this violates the plan of God's revelation on earth at all. It brings the ancient drama to a fitting if horrifying climax just before the return of Jesus Christ.

The people of God, whether the church of Israel in the wilderness in the Old Testament or the Israel of God among the Gentile Galatians in the New Testament, are one body who through Jesus will receive the promise of the heavenly city, the everlasting Zion. This heavenly inheritance has been the expectation of the people of God in all ages.

See my responses above. Except I might caution that even the unsaved Israelis as an "ethnic group" most likely have more importance in God's eyes than this document is willing to recognize.

7. Jesus taught that his resurrection was the raising of the True Temple of Israel. He has replaced the priesthood, sacrifices, and sanctuary of Israel by fulfilling them in his own glorious priestly ministry and by offering, once and for all, his sacrifice for the world, that is, for both Jew and Gentile. Believers from all nations are now being built up through him into this Third Temple, the church that Jesus promised to build.

Again, no argument, but again I make the suggestion that there are levels to prophecy, levels to the Temple, the one a type, yes, and the other its fulfillment, but it may be that God still has a use for the type in bringing the world to heel.

8. Simon Peter spoke of the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus in conjunction with the final judgment and the punishment of sinners. Instructively, this same Simon Peter, the Apostle to the Circumcision, says nothing about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel in the land of Palestine. Instead, as his readers contemplate the promise of Jesus' Second Coming, he fixes their hope upon the new heavens and the new earth, in which righteousness dwells.

It only makes sense that he would focus on the true fulfilled spiritual meaning of Israel, our true hope. A restored physical Israel isn't our hope, but it does seem to have acquired a separate secondary significance in our time as eschatalogical theories are proliferating and there are other signs of the last days rapidly approaching.

9. The entitlement of any one ethnic or religious group to territory in the Middle East called the "Holy Land" cannot be supported by Scripture. In fact, the land promises specific to Israel in the Old Testament were fulfilled under Joshua. The New Testament speaks clearly and prophetically about the destruction of the second temple in A.D. 70. No New Testament writer foresees a regathering of ethnic Israel in the land, as did the prophets of the Old Testament after the destruction of the first temple in 586 B.C. Moreover, the land promises of the Old Covenant are consistently and deliberately expanded in the New Testament to show the universal dominion of Jesus, who reigns from heaven upon the throne of David, inviting all the nations through the Gospel of Grace to partake of his universal and everlasting dominion.

Yes, all this is true. The Jews misunderstand the everlasting promise of the land to them as a people and are blinded to its fulfillment in Christ (though Abraham understood, and of course others). They are continuing to act out the types.

But that doesn't preclude the possibility that God is using these things to draw them back to the land for purposes of His own, and it seems to some of us that He has even demonstrated His watchfulness over Israel in certain miraculous protections in their various wars. In fact I think it takes a peculiar blindness not to notice these things playing out in history right before our eyes. Two levels. They have to come to Christ to be saved, but God may lead them there through their fleshly misunderstandings and through a great tribulation.

10. Bad Christian theology regarding the "Holy Land" contributed to the tragic cruelty of the Crusades in the Middle Ages. Lamentably, bad Christian theology is today attributing to secular Israel a divine mandate to conquer and hold Palestine, with the consequence that the Palestinian people are marginalized and regarded as virtual "Canaanites."

No! Now here I have to say that this is NOT what is happening. I wouldn't claim that Israel is especially righteous since they are a worldly nation without God, but anyone with eyes to see ought to be able to see that Israel is completely on the defensive among peoples who only want her dead, while she has gone great lengths to try to accommodate the Palestinians, who, first of all, have no right to that land (that's a historical fact) and second, have been offered land nevertheless and have always turned it down, and third, are kept in their marginalized position NOT by Israel but by their Islamist leaders and the surrounding Arab nations who are using them as pawns in their satanically inspired Islam-based war against israel.

The "bad theology" here, the theology that is likely to bring about bloodshed, however unwittingly, even another Holocaust, is the very Reformed theology of this document.

This doctrine is both contrary to the teaching of the New Testament and a violation of the Gospel mandate. In addition, this theology puts those Christians who are urging the violent seizure and occupation of Palestinian land in moral jeopardy of their own bloodguiltiness. Are we as Christians not called to pray for and work for peace, warning both parties to this conflict that those who live by the sword will die by the sword? Only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can bring both temporal reconciliation and the hope of an eternal and heavenly inheritance to the Israeli and the Palestinian. Only through Jesus Christ can anyone know peace on earth.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE. And perhaps we SHOULD be warning that living by the sword will bring death by the sword, and not only to these two warring parties but all warring parties in the world.

BUT THAT IS NOT PALESTINIAN LAND, that is a complete fiction designed to keep Israel on the defensive. I'm really sorry to see Reformed theologians defending a false understanding of what is going on over there, manufactured in perhaps unknowing collusion with Islamists who seek the death of Jews (and Christians and all other nonMuslims ultimately).

I don't think the Reformed thinkers behind this document are anti-semitic but they are certainly at least unwittingly playing into the growing anti-semitism of our time, which is spearheaded by Islam, and which will most likely build up to a new Holocaust under the Antichrist when he appears -- and that will fulfill the prophecy of "the time of Jacob's trouble" as prophesied in scripture:

Jeremiah 30:7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.

Meanwhile, yes yes yes, only the gospel of Christ can bring peace to this earth, in that situation or any situation, so let us take the gospel to the people with fervor -- fervor to the point of willingness to be beheaded because that is the likely cost of seriously evangelizing Muslims. It's what we should be doing. But no no no, your political analysis is all wrong.

The promised Messianic kingdom of Jesus Christ has been inaugurated. Its advent marks the focal point of human history. This kingdom of the Messiah is continuing to realize its fullness as believing Jews and Gentiles are added to the community of the redeemed in every generation. The same kingdom will be manifested in its final and eternal form with the return of Christ the King in all his glory.

True, but you seem to be glossing over quite a bit of prophecy on the way to that grand finale, Jesus' Olivet Discourse for instance, and the whole Book of Revelation and its types in the Old Testament for instance.

Of all the nations, the Jewish people played the primary role in the coming of the Messianic kingdom. New Testament Scripture declares that to them were given the oracles of God, the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises. Theirs are the fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and from them, according to the flesh, came Christ. Salvation is, indeed, of the Jews. While affirming the Scriptural teaching that there is no salvation outside of Christ, Christians should acknowledge with heartfelt sorrow and grief the frequent oppression of the Jews in history, sometimes tragically done in the name of the cross.

But what are we to make of the unbelief of Israel? Has their unbelief made the faithfulness of God without effect for them? No, God has not completely rejected the people of Israel, and we join the apostle Paul in his earnest prayer for the salvation of his Jewish kinsmen according to the flesh. There always has been and always will be a remnant that is saved. While not all Israel will experience the blessing of participation in the Messianic kingdom, yet Jews who do come to faith in Christ will share in his reign throughout the present age and into eternity. In addition, it is not as though the rejection of some in Israel for unbelief serves no purpose. On the contrary, because they were broken off in unbelief, the Gospel has gone to the Gentiles, who now, through faith, partake of the blessings to the fathers and join with believing Jews to constitute the true Israel of God, the church of Jesus Christ.

The drama of the last days that some of us see as likely to unfold is to bring in such a glorious harvest of Jews and others to make this "all things going on as usual" understanding look pretty anemic.

The present secular state of Israel, however, is not an authentic or prophetic realization of the Messianic kingdom of Jesus Christ.

No, in itself it is not the REALIZATION of the Messianic kingdom, of course not, but it may be a prophetic realization ON THE WAY to the final fullness of that Messianic kingdom, leading up to the return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. On the way to that desired end some pretty miserable situations have to develop and the reclamation of the land of Israel seems to be a major stepping stone. I would hope this idea that it embodies some kind of happy fulfillment could be done away with. If it is held by some it is certainly not held by many. A lot has yet to happen to bring the people of Israel into the Kingdom of God, it isn't going to stay a secular state. It's going to be ultimately replaced by the heavenly Jerusalem, although I don't yet have a settled view of how and when. If the "literal" reading of the Book of Revelation is correct, the last days are going to entail unimaginable sufferings, unimaginable evil, but the end result is going to be a purification and a fitting for the Kingdom of God of the overcomers. The secular state is NOT the goal. PLEASE -- who is saying it is???? I hate to think that there are many Christians who believe as this document thinks they do. I have to think this is a monumental straw-man misrepresentation.

Furthermore, a day should not be anticipated in which Christ's kingdom will manifest Jewish distinctives, whether by its location in "the land," by its constituency, or by its ceremonial institutions and practices. Instead, this present age will come to a climactic conclusion with the arrival of the final, eternal phase of the kingdom of the Messiah. At that time, all eyes, even of those who pierced him, will see the King in his glory. Every knee will bow, and every tongue will declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. The kingdoms of this world will become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign forever and ever.

In light of the grand prophetic expectation of the New Testament, we urge our evangelical brothers and sisters to return to the proclamation of the free offer of Christ's grace in the Gospel to all the children of Abraham, to pray for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, and to promise all humanitarian sympathy and practical support for those on both sides who are suffering in this current vicious cycle of atrocity and displacement. We also invite those Christian educators and pastors who share our convictions on the people of God, the land of Israel, and the impartiality of the Gospel to join their names with ours as signatories to this open letter.

Advent

In the Year of our Lord 2002

Soli Deo Gloria

[A long list of signers follows]

Well, I probably repeated myself much too much in the above and may come back and try to refine it later.

The upshot of my response to this document is that while its declarations of the gospel are unimpeachable, they've got the historical and political factor wrong, they aren't appreciating the gloriously Biblical foundation of the view of Israel's resoration that they are objecting to, and worst of all they are feeding the very anti-semitism they decry. ABSOLUTELY UNINTENTIONALLY!!!! -- I underscore that. This is not anti-semitism, it is simply a deplorable misreading of the historical facts through a theological lens that for all its laudable emphasis on the gospel of Christ trivializes it by stripping it of its full context.

Answering Reformed Objections to Evangelical Support of Israel

I ran across the link to this document on a Reformed Christian website, and besides its being provocative because my political persuasions about Israel are so much the opposite, it also looked like it would make a useful vehicle for exploring some of my objections to the theological position it represents.

An Open Letter to Evangelicals and Other Interested Parties:

The People of God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel

Recently a number of leaders in the Protestant community of the United States have urged the endorsement of far-reaching and unilateral political commitments to the people and land of Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, citing Holy Scripture as the basis for those commitments. To strengthen their endorsement, several of these leaders have also insisted that they speak on behalf of the seventy million people who constitute the American evangelical community.

It is good and necessary for evangelical leaders to speak out on the great moral issues of our day in obedience to Christ's call for his disciples to be salt and light in the world. It is quite another thing, however, when leaders call for commitments that are based upon a serious misreading of Holy Scripture. In such instances, it is good and necessary for other evangelical leaders to speak out as well. We do so here in the hope that we may contribute to the cause of the Lord Christ, apart from whom there can never be true and lasting peace in the world.

At the heart of the political commitments in question are two fatally flawed propositions. First, some are teaching that God's alleged favor toward Israel today is based upon ethnic descent rather than upon the grace of Christ alone, as proclaimed in the Gospel.

Has this been stated somewhere in these terms? Perhaps in a document of this sort they can't specifically quote the position they're answering?

I haven't carefully followed this issue but this sounds like an extrapolation and not a fair representation of the position in question Perhaps there are some who see it as described. I suspect there are many different shades of theology involved among Protestants who support Israel with at least some degree of Biblical perspective on it. In a sense I don't support Israel because of my Biblical beliefs at all; I simply think they have a right to be where they are and they are the victims in the whole scenario.

But in terms of the Biblical framework, it is true that present-day Israelis think in terms of their ethnic claims to the reestablishment of Israel, which they see as given to them by God, while I see it as a different historical route to the grace of Christ for the Jews that picks up some unfinished Old Testament threads, not as a denial of the grace of Christ. When the prophecies are understood in the messianic context, this removes all the ethnic assumptions, but I believe they are nevertheless to have a literal earthly fulfillment as well. God's promises to bring them back to the land and cause the land to flower may certainly have a messianic fulfillment in Christ and His Church and the Kingdom of God, but that doesn't mean they won't also have a literal earthly fulfillment as well.

I have to admit, however, that much of my reasoning is based on the fact that Israel is there, that the wilderness has been flowering under their care, that against extreme odds they won some wars that were initiated against them by others, and that their neighbors and the world hate them with a passionate unjust hatred -- all signs that this is God's work.

God began His revelation of Himself on this dusty material planet, and it makes perfect sense that He would bring His final revelation of His glory -- to the entire human family as well as the heavenly creatures -- from the same geographic place He chose to set His name in the first place.

The Reformed or Amillennialist position insists that there are no unfinished Old Testament threads, that all have been fulfilled in Christ and the Church. I'm not sure that ALL the prophecies have been fulfilled. Certainly in Christ there is now no more Jew nor Gentile but we are all one in Christ; certainly the Church IS the true Israel of God -- and yet there does seem to be some unfinished business left for the physical land of Israel. OR, put it this way: Even if all the OT prophecies have been completely fulfilled in Christ, that doesn't prevent there being another level, if you will, to those same prophecies that is yet to have a literal physical temporal fulfillment.

And again, this would be quite in keeping with the fact that the whole Old Testament plays out in this real world after all, even if Israel and the temple and the land are all now fulfilled in Christ and His Church. That is, God may still have dealings with Israel on a temporal earthly level, with the ultimate goal of both judging this world AND bringing the last generation of Jews into His Church.

The angels told the disciples that Jesus is going to come back exactly the same way He left, in real time to a real physical planet, and I don't see a way to spiritualize the passage that describes His literal physical return to the Mount of Olives, which will then split from the impact. Since to the Reformed mindset Israel does not rightly belong where it is, it seems they have to imagine an uninhabitable wilderness with a few scattered farms and nomads, as Mark Twain witnessed Palestine in the 19th century, as the proper place for Christ's return.

Second, others are teaching that the Bible's promises concerning the land are fulfilled in a special political region or "Holy Land," perpetually set apart by God for one ethnic group alone. As a result of these false claims, large segments of the evangelical community, our fellow citizens, and our government are being misled with regard to the Bible's teachings regarding the people of God, the land of Israel, and the impartiality of the Gospel.

There is probably something to this criticism as I've heard this idea expressed by supporters of Israel, even to the denial of the need for Jews to be saved through Christ, but I think it's a minority view. If it's not, if much of how this document characterizes the supporters of Israel IS true, then I have to say I don't agree with THEM either.

However, again on the earthly physical level, the repopulation and revitalization of the land of Israel, PLUS their being surrounded by implacable enemies, certainly looks like fulfilled prophecy, at the very very least certainly HAS to be God's own work. I think these Reformed theologians are falling for a false either/or -- and perhaps there is some reason for this if their opponents are doing the same thing in the opposite direction.

In what follows, we make our convictions public. We do so acknowledging the genuine evangelical faith of many who will not agree with us. Knowing that we may incur their disfavor, we are nevertheless constrained by scripture and by conscience to publish the following propositions for the cause of Christ and truth.

1. The Gospel offers eternal life in heaven to Jews and Gentiles alike as a free gift in Jesus Christ. Eternal life in heaven is not earned or deserved, nor is it based upon ethnic descent or natural birth.

I must say I feel like saying to this, "So what else is new?" because it seems to be erecting a straw man of the evangelical defense of Israel. Again, MAYBE there are some (I've seen some who appear to tilt in that direction) who deny this fundamental gospel truth, but I doubt that's more than a slim minority, while everyone else would say "Of course, we know that."

2. All human beings, Jews and Gentiles alike, are sinners, and, as such, they are under God's judgment of death. Because God's standard is perfect obedience and all are sinners, it is impossible for anyone to gain temporal peace or eternal life by his own efforts. Moreover, apart from Christ, there is no special divine favor upon any member of any ethnic group; nor, apart from Christ, is there any divine promise of an earthly land or a heavenly inheritance to anyone, whether Jew or Gentile. To teach or imply otherwise is nothing less than to compromise the Gospel itself.

Perhaps they are answering a fringe segment, such as John Hagee and others who believe like him? I think they are a small minority among those who strongly support Israel's existence as fulfillment of prophecy.

Again, I don't know if my view of this is shared by many others or not, but I think this is a function of the two levels of prophetic fulfillment I suggest above. They don't contradict each other, they are parallel aspects of God's revelation. God's people ARE Christ's people, He is the way and no-one comes to the Father but by Him, so the Jews have to become Christ's people to be saved, but on the way there God is also dealing with all the peoples of earth.

Besides saving out a people for Himself He also has the objective of declaring His glory and His possession of the land -- the land is the whole earth as well as the spiritual or heavenly Canaan. His Israelites were His chosen instrument for that purpose and after all the promises have been fulfilled in Christ He might yet resume those dealings in the 70th week of Daniel, both to bring His rebellious people to Christ and to judge the world. Sure, I guess He could do this without temporal Israel, but it looks to many like He's chosen to do it with them. He'll probably teach some Christians a lesson in the process too.

Biblical logic is on our side. For instance, the Seventieth Week of Daniel is a major major sign that the Reformed camp seems to want to play down. The first 69 weeks of Daniel's prophecy were fulfilled EXACTLY, so why would we expect the 70th to be fulfilled any less exactly? And since it remains unfinished to this day it must be yet future, and since the first 69 week marked off the last years of the Old Testament up to the revelation of Christ as King, it makes perfect sense that the last week could very well occur within a resumed Old Testament context and be marked by the revelation of the Antichrist, and this does seem to require a restoration of Old Testament trappings, Israel itself, the temple and so on, even if ultimately these things will have to be abandoned as the Reality of Christ and the heavenly Jerusalem is completed. It's beautiful, it's almost symphonic in its arrangement, I do think it takes a spiritual tin ear to hold to the one-dimensional Reformed argument.

3. God, the Creator of all mankind, is merciful and takes no pleasure in punishing sinners. Yet God is also holy and just and must punish sin. Therefore, to satisfy both his justice and his mercy, God has appointed one way of salvation for all, whether Jew or Gentile, in Jesus Christ alone.

No argument here, folks. I'll try to be sparing now about repeating what I've said above.

4. Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully man, came into the world to save sinners. In his death upon the cross, Jesus was the Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world, of Jew and of Gentile alike. The death of Jesus forever fulfilled and eternally ended the sacrifices of the Jewish temple. All who would worship God, whether Jew or Gentile, must now come to him in spirit and truth through Jesus Christ alone. The worship of God is no longer identified with any specific earthly sanctuary. He receives worship only through Jesus Christ, the eternal and heavenly Temple.

No argument here either. As for the project to rebuild the Temple, I really don't see that Christians regard this as a legitimate alternative to Christianity -- do some? Sad if so, but that hasn't been my impression from the discussions and studies I've been in on about this. As many objectors to this idea point out, its reestablishment would be blasphemy in itself. But it seems to me that's a major theme of the last days, the coming to fruition of the "mystery of inquity."

The blinded Jews want the Temple back, of course, it's part of their heritage as they understand it, and it IS possible to argue from scripture that it must be rebuilt to fulfill certain prophecies of the last days. It's just a type, and in the Christian age it's blasphemy, but may nevertheless very possibly be packed with implications for God's plans for planet earth and indeed the entire cosmos: to glorify Himself in the eyes of the world in the full redemption of the Jews, the root of the tree into which the Gentiles were grafted, and in the judgment of the world. To glorify Himself. The ethnic factor is error, but they aren't Christians -- yet.

5. To as many as receive and rest upon Christ alone through faith alone, to Jews and Gentiles alike, God gives eternal life in his heavenly inheritance.

6. The inheritance promises that God gave to Abraham were made effective through Christ, Abraham's True Seed. These promises were not and cannot be made effective through sinful man's keeping of God's law.

Very true and I don't know any Christian who thinks otherwise.

Continued next post.